VICP Registry Case Source Bundle Canonical URL: https://vicp-registry.org/case/USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00470 Package ID: USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00470 Petitioner: Najee Shields Filed: 2014-06-04 Decided: 2020-03-24 Vaccine: DTaP Vaccination date: 2012-06-20 Condition: acute illness which led to his death Outcome: dismissed Award amount USD: AI-assisted case summary: On June 4, 2014, Dorothy Shields, as representative of the estate of her deceased minor grandchild Najee Shields, filed a petition under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. The petition alleged that Najee Shields received diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis (DTaP), Haemophilus influenzae type B (Hib), inactivated polio virus (IPV), pneumococcal, and rotavirus vaccines on June 20, 2012. It was alleged that Najee Shields suffered an acute illness which led to his death on June 21, 2012. The public decision does not provide a detailed medical timeline beyond these dates. On March 24, 2020, petitioner filed a motion to dismiss the petition. Petitioner maintained her belief that the vaccines caused Najee's death but stated that, in light of the Federal Circuit's decision in Boatmon v. Secretary of Health & Human Services, she did not believe she could prove that the vaccines played a causative role. Petitioner concluded that proceeding further would be unreasonable and that she would be unable to prove entitlement to compensation. Petitioner was represented by Edward M. Kraus of the Law Offices of Chicago Kent. Respondent was represented by Christine M. Becer of the U.S. Department of Justice. Special Master Thomas L. Gowen granted the petitioner's motion for dismissal. Special Master Gowen found that the record did not contain persuasive evidence of a Table injury or persuasive evidence that Najee's illness or death was caused by the vaccines. He noted that the Vaccine Act requires claims to be supported by medical records or the opinion of a competent medical expert, and that petitioner's experts had not presented opinions sufficient to support entitlement after Boatmon. The case was dismissed for insufficient proof, and no compensation was awarded. Theory of causation field: On June 20, 2012, Najee Shields, age approximately 0.41 years, received DTaP, Hib, IPV, pneumococcal, and rotavirus vaccines. He allegedly suffered an acute illness and died on June 21, 2012. This was a death case. Petitioner Dorothy Shields, representative of Najee Shields's estate, believed the vaccines caused the death but moved for dismissal after the Federal Circuit's decision in Boatmon v. HHS made a substantially similar causation theory untenable. The public decision does not provide a detailed clinical timeline beyond the vaccination, acute illness, and death dates. Special Master Thomas L. Gowen found no persuasive evidence of a Table injury and no persuasive medical record or expert opinion evidence supporting causation in light of Boatmon. The case was dismissed for insufficient proof. Petitioner was represented by Edward M. Kraus. Respondent was represented by Christine M. Becer. Decision dated March 24, 2020. No award. Public staged source text: ================================================================================ DOCUMENT 1: USCOURTS-cofc-1_14-vv-00470-1 Date issued/filed: 2020-04-16 Pages: 2 Docket text: PUBLIC DECISION (Originally filed: 3/24/20) regarding 90 DECISION of Special Master. Signed by Special Master Thomas L. Gowen. (kb) Service on parties made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Case 1:14-vv-00470-UNJ Document 91 Filed 04/16/20 Page 1 of 2 In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS Filed: March 24, 2020 * * * * * * * * * * * * * DOROTHY SHIELDS, * Representative, Estate of * UNPUBLISHED NAJEE SHIELDS, * * No. 14-470V Petitioner, * v. * Special Master Gowen * SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Motion for Dismissal Decision; Diphtheria- AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Tetanus-Acellular Pertussis (“DTaP”); * Haemophilus Influenzae Type B (“Hib”); Respondent. * Inactivated Polio (“IPV”); Pneumococcal; * Rotavirus; Boatmon. * * * * * * * * * * * * * Edward M. Kraus, Law Offices of Chicago Kent, Chicago, IL, for petitioner. Christine M. Becer, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. DECISION1 On June 4, 2014, Dorothy Shields (“petitioner”), as representative of the estate of her deceased minor grandchild Najee Shields, filed a petition in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.2 Petitioner alleged that as a result of receiving diphtheria-tetanus- acellular pertussis (“DTaP”), haemophilus influenzae type B (“Hib”), inactivated polio virus (“IPV”), pneumococcal, and rotavirus vaccines on June 20, 2012, Najee Shields suffered an acute illness which led to his death on June 21, 2012. The information in the record, does not establish entitlement to compensation. 1 Pursuant to the E-Government Act of 2002, see 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012), because this opinion contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the website of the United States Court of Federal Claims. The court’s website is at http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/aggregator/sources/7. This means the opinion will be available to anyone with access to the Internet. Before the opinion is posted on the court’s website, each party has 14 days to file a motion requesting redaction “of any information furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule 18(b). An objecting party must provide the court with a proposed redacted version of the opinion. Id. If neither party files a motion for redaction within 14 days, the opinion will be posted on the court’s website without any changes. Id. 2 The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is set forth in Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755, codified as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (2012) (Vaccine Act or the Act). All citations in this decision to individual sections of the Vaccine Act are to 42 U.S.C.A. § 300aa. Case 1:14-vv-00470-UNJ Document 91 Filed 04/16/20 Page 2 of 2 On March 24, 2020, petitioner filed a motion for a decision dismissing the petition. Petitioner’s Motion (“Pet. Mot.”) (ECF No. 89). Petitioner believes that the vaccines Najee received on June 20, 2012, caused his death. Id. at ¶ 1. Unfortunately, because of the Federal Circuit’s opinion in Boatmon v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 941 F.3d 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2019), which deals with a substantially similar theory of medical causation, petitioner does not believe that she can prove that the vaccines played a causative role in Najee’s death. Id. Therefore, following a thorough investigation, petitioner believes that she will be unable to prove that she is entitled to compensation in the Vaccine Program. Id. In these circumstances, to proceed further would be unreasonable. Id. at ¶ 2. Petitioner has been advised by her counsel that a decision dismissing her petition will result in a judgment against her. Id. at ¶ 3. She has been advised that such a judgment will end all of her rights in the Vaccine Program. Id. Petitioner understands that her attorney may apply for fees and costs once her case is dismissed and judgment is entered against her. Id. at ¶ 4. Respondent expressly reserves the right, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e), to question the good faith and reasonable basis of the claim and to oppose, if appropriate, the application for fees and costs. Id. To receive compensation in the Vaccine Program, petitioners have the burden of proving either: (1) that the vaccinee suffered a “Table Injury,” i.e., an injury beginning within a specified period of time following receipt of a corresponding vaccine listed on the Vaccine Injury Table (a “Table injury”) or (2) that the vaccinee suffered an injury that was caused-in-fact by a covered vaccine. §§ 13(a)(1)(A); 11(c)(1). An examination of the record does not contain persuasive evidence that the vaccinee suffered a “Table Injury.” Further, the record does not contain persuasive evidence indicating that the vaccinee’s injury was caused or in any way related to the vaccines which he received. Moreover, under the Vaccine Act, the Vaccine Program may not award compensation based on the petitioner’s claims alone. Rather, the petitioner must support the claim with either medical records or the opinion of a competent medical expert. § 13(a)(1). In this case, the medical records are insufficient to establish entitlement and petitioner’s experts have not presented opinion(s) that support a finding of entitlement in light of the Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Boatmon, 941 F.3d at 1361-62. Thus, petitioner’s motion is GRANTED. This matter is DISMISSED for insufficient proof. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly.3 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Thomas L. Gowen Thomas L. Gowen Special Master 3 Entry of judgment is expedited by each party’s filing notice renouncing the right to seek review. Vaccine Rule 11(a). 2